FedaykinThe Tristar should be in service for a good while yet – they are being used heavily, but there are more airframes available if the government actually went and bought them! Marshalls of Cambridge offered to convert all the current Tristars to three point tankers, and add another nine or so aircraft to the fleet. This was, unfortunately given no real attention by the government, since they seemed obsessed with signing the disastrous deal with EADS, whereby the RAF tanker fleet will be reduced to just nine A-330MRTTs, with a further five available when really needed, though the RAF will probably have to buy time on them (since it means taking them out of passenger service).
As for the VC-10, I still think the best bet would be to buy a large number of used A-310s, and have them all converted – a fleet of ~20-30 A-310s and ~10 Tristars would be far better than ~10 A-330s!
And finally, the Jaguar – great aircraft, and very well suited to deployed operations, it would probably have been ideal for the UK forces in Afghanistan, though the lack of thrust might limit payload. Basically a good aircraft, though I still feel the UK would have been better served by Jaguar being cancelled (the French probably wanting Mirage F-1s instead), and the UK buying into the F-16 deal of the century, preferably for 150-250 Vipers!
The lease of Nine A330 is an utter scandal! How anyone in the government can think this will even close to meeting the current needs of the UK armed forces is beyond me.
Another one of those poxy PFI deals where we have to pay vast amounts of money to some company over many years for something we won’t even own!
An outright buy of a310 and a330 should have been the path taken by the MOD!
FedaykinI think whilst Future Lynx is the right choice for the navy its just too small for the army in the troop transport role, on the other hand the Future Lynx is just right for the Battlefield Scout Role.
I would like to see a purchase of Future Lynx for the Navy to replace the older Lynx in service and a purchase for the Army/Marines in the Scout role followed by a purchase of the AW149 to replace the Puma.
You would then get the balanced Helicopter force the Army needs:
Apache AH.1 For the attack role.
Future Lynx for Battlefield Scout and light troop transport capability.
AW149 to replace Puma in the medium role.
EH101 Merlin for Medium to Heavy.
Chinook for Heavy lift role.
Best of all it helps British industry in the Aerospace sector which is vital for the economy. It could of been so easy for the Italians to close down the UK side of operations, I think the British people need to be greatful for this decision.
P.S. Will anyone meet the challenge to find an AW149 concept picture.
FedaykinSuper cool pictures!
Fedaykin[QUOTE=signatory]
After supporting winter tests of the Westland WAH-64 in Sweden I would say this version is a front runner, followed by Rooivalk due to offset/political reasons involving SAAB. WAH-64 because of the UK assembly line, a close relationship in the EU battle groups and industry, new engine, and de-icing system.
QUOTE]
I’m sure Augusta Westland would love to pick up an order for WAH-64 for Sweden, it would certainly give more justification to the UK assembly line but Im not sure if Boeing would sanction it.
I’m sure Boeing would say that if Sweden wants an RTM-322 powered Apache with the de-icing kit among other things an American factory could supply.
FedaykinWe mustn’t forget that Westland was going to build the WS-70 Blackhawk as a Puma replacement but that fell through.
FedaykinIts embarrasing for the leader of the fourth wealthiest nation on the planet to be flying commercial.
Even some quite poor countries have airliner size transport for their heads of state.
Your suggestions would certainly hit the mark Ja Worsley but I would also like to see a a330/B777 class type. The a330 would make sense considering the UKs commitment to the a330 tanker.
I think its also worth mentioning the a330 tanker deal, another poxy PFI deal for just nine aircraft plus a couple of surge aircraft to replace all the VC10 and Tristar. I don’t have the exact figures but the UK Tristar and VC10 force are massively over stretched meeting tanking requirements as it is at the moment. The crazy thing is we chose the a330 tanker before you but whilst we have been locked in stupid PFI negotiations you bought yours and are now taking delivery………….it totally sucks! 😡
Personally I would of liked on the short term the upgrade of the Tristar C.mk2/a to tanker capability and an outright purchase of a310 tanker transport and a330 tanker transport to replace the VC.10 and Tristar.
FedaykinIm sure I have a brochure somewhere for the AIP system being fitted to german subs. I will dig it out and see if it is scanable on Monday
FedaykinWe have already been talking about this in the Collins and Oyashio class size comparison thread.
No point in going over old ground.
FedaykinYes canning the Belfast in 1976 was a no brainer as far as the RAF was concerned, saying that I was happy because I got to see the Heavylift ones operating out of Stansted on a very regular basis 😀 . It was either 1980 (Zimbabwe) or 1982 (Falklands) that the RAF started to charter them, and we still do charter civil transports, even with the C-17’s in service (AN-124’s were chartered during Op Telic, and a civil airline does the Falklands flights, as well as the F3 swaps done by AN-124’s).
In a logistics sense flying the F3 out the Falklands has worked out very well, Im sure I have seen a photo of a C17 offloading an F3 at the Falklands.
FedaykinBah! The Belfast was a fine plane. Some served as civilian freighters for many years after the RAF disposed of ’em (one may still be in use, in Australia). Should have kept ’em. And an improved version would have been nice. How many years did we have to charter civilian planes for anything a C-130 couldn’t carry, until the C-17s arrived?
The stupid thing is the MOD had to lease the Belfast’s back for the Falklands war at a greater cost then if they had been retained in service.
The Belfast debacle in my mind was one of the more short sighted decisions made by the MOD.
FedaykinThe Canadians don’t even use the MK-48 ADCAP for that matter.
There were issues with taking the Upholder class out of mothballs especially with the last to be refited HMS Upholder/Chicoutimi, she had been canabalised to get the other boats up and running.
Everytime I get frustrated about the situation of funding and equipment with the Royal Navy I always remind myself that its nothing in comparison to the woes of the Canadian naval section.
Im not sure the upholders ever did get fitted for Spearfish, the Mk 24 Tigerfish and possibly the MK 8 along with the Harpoon would of been a more likely fit.
FedaykinFed:The officers are bread to believe in their equipment and should anything bad go wrong with them they will never tell either the lower ranks or the public, that is a rule. The lower ranks will always complain about the equipment and or the conditions, it’s general nature.
All too true Ja W the amount of docu’s I have seen over the years with that being the case.
Thinking about Francs comment I have to agree that is one of the advantages of Nuke boats no lack of power (in theory). I do believe that my own navy should never got rid of the Upholder class, once the bugs had been ironed out it was a handy part of the fleet (I know there were further problems when they were handed over to Canada but much of that was down to mothballing them for so long).
FedaykinThe US doesn’t use captured Russian jets for combat training it just isn’t cost effective. Aggressor fighters have a very heavy life and keeping Russian jets serviceable would be problematic. Aircraft already in the inventory like the F16 and F5 are used with the pilots using different tactics.
The jets that were captured have been put through testing to allow a better understanding of the performance of russian types. Alot of this was done at Groom Lake under great secrecy.
Its worth noting that the US army does use helicopter types like the Mil 8 and Mil 24 for training of their troops.
Fedaykin— Very off topic —
Already been done as attached photo showns, However does not come in a trainer version 😮 . (Bloodhound 2 of 25 Sqn at North Coates at a Village Fate some were in Lincolnshire in 1964. Warhead bay modified so that kids could be photographed as ‘Bloodhound Pilots’. 😎 ).
Thanks BIGVERN thats been added to my photo collection.
Maybe if thats the advanced trainer the Hawker Siddley Red Top is the initial trainer. :diablo:
FedaykinDon’t worry Ja W considering there is quite a time difference between the UK and Australia I wasn’t expecting an instant reply. :p
Considering you asked for more Aus related stuff recently I thought you might like a thread started by one of us Euro centric types.
An interesting program I must admit, whilst the officers were all being diplomatic about the qualities of the Collins class I got the impression that the lower ranks were less impressed about the serviceability of certain equipment especially the Diesels (reminds me of the issues that the RN had with the Upholder class). I get the impression that RAN uses its subs more like blue water nuclear hunter killer types, in that respect AIP would seem to be an excellent upgrade.
The female crew issue is interesting as the RN’s sub service has managed to avoid mixed crewing up till now. With navies like the RAN bringing in mixed crews with smaller diesel types I think it is going to be harder for the RN’s silent service to avoid the change or put forward a reasonable excuse. I wouldn’t be surprised if the RN experiments with this major crewing change over the next five years.
Sign In
